The Universalist Examined and Convicted, Chapter 20
CHAP. XX. Of the Arguments confirming the Propoſition.
WHerein I ſhall firſt touch his faire flouriſh in the entrance, viz.
[To ſatisfie ſuch as would have reaſon ſatisfied, reaſons are added]
So that now we may ſet up a generall (ſiquis) if any would have his reaſon ſatisfied, let him come hither: and he doth well to ſatisfie reaſon, for he hath not yet confirmed our faith; but what perſons are they that muſt be ſatisfied? certainely none but ſuch as are ſatisfied with any thing; yet thus farre my reaſon is ſatisfied, that the Author hath not light upon forcible arguments to prove this poſition. As for his arguments produced, no anſwer need be given, muchleſſe much paines to be ſpent in a ſolicitous anſwer; and this any intelligent Reader will grant, if he conſider theſe particulars concerning them.
1. Obſerve that in all he produceth Scriptures to backe his concluſions, providing himſelf againſt ſuch (as having as little skill as himſelf in ratiotination,) may deny the concluſion, which is againſt the rule of argumentation, in which if good, the concluſion hath ſtrength enough from the premiſes, and let them be right, I will warrant his concluſion; now what ſtrength of Argument can we expect from ſuch as is ſo weakely verſed in that way?
2. His arguments are many, ſix in number, to call the eyes of men upon that truth that is backed by multitude of arguments, when he deceiveth them utterly; for his mediums are all coincident in one; let us veiw them. His
[1. Saith, That which the Scripture plainely affirmeth in plaine words, is true.
2. Saith, T… for whom Chriſt and his Apoſtles in plaine termes affirme Chriſt to come to ſave, them he did come to ſave.
3. Saith, That which Scripture layeth downe as one end of his death &c. is to be beleeved.
4. Saith, That which the Scripture ſets forth in generall for the world, it a truth.
5: Saith, That which may be proved in and by Scripture in plaine ſentences, &c. is a truth.]
Now let any divine Chymniſt extract a difference betwixt any of theſe; doe they nor deſerve by the variety of matter to be ranged as diſtinct arguments? ſhould I have diſtinct anſwers, I ſhould runne into the Authors folly.
3. Let us view the concluſions in all, and ſo ſee what he proveth in all his plaine Scriptures. His
[1. Thus, That he gave himſelfe a ranſome for all, and taſted death for every man.
2. He came to ſave ſinners, world, unjuſt, ungodly.
3. That by his death he is Lord of all.
4. That he was ſent to be the Saviour of the world, that whoever beleeveth ſhould not periſh.
5. That he hath in dying lordſhip over all.
6. That he gave himſelfe a ranſome for all, and taſted death for every man.]
Now not to inſiſt on that peccancy, in having ſuch various concluſions about one and the ſame queſtion, wherein he cannot ſatisfie that requiſite in reaſoning to conclude with the queſtion; this I ſay, none of theſe concluſions are againſt us, which may be reduced to that peccancy in reaſoning which is called (ignoratio elenchi;) none of his arguments are in right forme, they have more in the concluſion then his premiſes contribute to them, all have ſome or other obliquity; but ſeeing all of them are but one medium, and ſo in effect but one argument, I ſhall give this one anſwer, (conceditur totum,) and he can deſire no more of us then to grant all he ſaith; now in the iſſue either his weaknes appeareth in producing that againſt us which we may grant, or ours in granting that which maketh againſt us; let him put it to the triall.